Lahoud v Lahoud

In the matter of Lahoud v Lahoud, the dispute revolved around the calculation and interest on legal costs, the effect of amendments to the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (UCPR), and procedural fairness in the disclosure of costs agreements between parties and their solicitors. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary legal issues concerned the interpretation of the UCPR regarding interest on costs, the effect of legislative changes on pre-existing orders, and the admissibility of costs agreements under client legal privilege.

The court considered whether the earlier order for interest on costs at rates set out in the repealed Schedule 5 of the UCPR should still apply post-amendment. It determined that the amendment did not retrospectively affect the rate of interest for periods prior to the amendment's effective date. Regarding the time during which interest should run, the court held that interest should not accrue during periods of justified delay, such as the time taken to prepare a bill of costs before a High Court special leave application was determined and while an appeal to the District Court was pending. The court also addressed the issue of client legal privilege in the context of costs agreements, concluding that such agreements were not privileged as they were commercial contracts rather than communications protected by legal professional privilege.

Ultimately, the court ruled that the costs agreements were not privileged and could be disclosed to the costs assessor. The court found that the JL Parties unreasonably delayed in preparing a bill of costs, leading to an order that the VL Parties should bear 33% of the costs associated with both parties' Notices of Motion. This decision highlighted the importance of timely action in cost recovery proceedings and the court's discretion to allocate costs in cases of unreasonable delay.